What's wrong with physics?

[We Never Know]

Of course not. The weight of the air does all the jobs:


Of course as I don´t believe in ghostst.

Im going to stick my neck out here.

Drop a bowling ball and feather, they both fall because of gravity yet because of air resistsnce and mass the bowling ball falls faster.

Drop them in a vacuum where there is no air resistance, only gravity, and they fall at the same speed.

 

[Polymath257]

Im going to stick my neck out here.

Drop a bowling ball and feather, they both fall because of gravity yet because of air resistsnce and mass the bowling ball falls faster.

Drop them in a vacuum where there is no air resistance, only gravity, and they fall at the same speed.

Nice video.

Prediction: it will be ignored.

 

[Native]

BUT THINGS STILL FALL IN A VACUUM.

WELL DON´T MAKE SUCH ARTIFICIAL VACUUMS!

This means that air pressure is NOT what makes things fall.

Well then pump the gases completely out - which you can´t.

I said:
Of clourse I do as I´m only dealing with the very basics of natural conditions and not what happens when fiddling with these.

then you aren't doing science.

You´ve just confirmed that natural conditions isn´t science. Which I´ve been aware of for several decades from "standard" cosmology.

 

[Polymath257]

WELL DON´T MAKE SUCH ARTIFICIAL VACUUMS!

That is how you test to see if air pressure is what produces falling.

The conclusion is that it doesn't.

You need to deal with this simple fact.

Well then pump the gases completely out - which you can´t.

We can do so well enough to know that it isn't air pressure that makes things fall.

I said:
Of clourse I do as I´m only dealing with the very basics of natural conditions and not what happens when fiddling with these.

You´ve just confirmed that natural conditions isn´t science. Which I´ve been aware of for several decades from "standard" cosmology.

You can't simply ignore the fact that things fall in a vacuum in spite of the fact that there is almost no air pressure. That shows your view to be wrong.

 

[Native]

Nice video.

Prediction: it will be ignored.

Of course not. I´ll just recommend that every single molecule of gas to be removed.
(Remember to stop pumping before the tank implodes because a lack of atmospheric pressure)

 

[Polymath257]

Of course not. I´ll just recommend that every single molecule of gas to be removed.
(Remember to stop pumping before the tank implodes because a lack of atmospheric pressure)

And why would every single molecule need to be removed to show that air pressure is irrelevant to falling? The barometric pressure in the tank isn't as low as it is in outer space, but it is certainly low enough that the air inside isn't making things fall because of its weight.

For example, why is it that a feather falls *faster* when there is a vacuum than when there is air?

 

[Native]

The barometric pressure in the tank isn't as low as it is in outer space, but it is certainly low enough that the air inside isn't making things fall because of its weight.

I´ve several times now said to you to count on the orbital velocity pressure on the Earth AND the weight of air, but you´ll have nothing of this logics as your theory have even the outer space to be empty - against all natural logics.

 

[Polymath257]

I´ve several times now said to you to count on the orbital velocity pressure on the Earth AND the weight of air, but you´ll have nothing of this logics as your theory have even the outer space to be empty - against all natural logics.

THERE IS NO ORBITAL PRESSURE. SPACE IS A VACUUM.

The minor pressure from solar wind only serves to move *small* things like dust, not large things like planets.

 

[Native]

THERE IS NO ORBITAL PRESSURE. SPACE IS A VACUUM.

Get into the 2021 - Dynamical friction - Wikipedia

 

[Polymath257]

Get into the 2021 - Dynamical friction - Wikipedia

And do you understand what it is saying? This is describing the formation stage of a planetary system, when things are coalescing. At that stage there is much more dust, planetessimals, etc than there are now.

And yes, this is important when galaxies *collide* because the gas is then compressed, often producing star forming regions. Nonetheless, the density of that gas remains very low. Typical H II regions have around 10-100 molecules per cubic centimeter. That is an incredibly high vacuum.

 

[Native]

Im going to stick my neck out here.
Drop a bowling ball and feather, they both fall because of gravity yet because of air resistsnce and mass the bowling ball falls faster.
Drop them in a vacuum where there is no air resistance, only gravity, and they fall at the same speed.

Sorry for the delay of a response. Let´s analyze what is going on here.

1) You set up the experiment in the tank.
2) You remove most of the gases in the tank.
3) By removing the gases, you also removes the atmospheric pressure.
4) When there is no gases and atmospheric pressure in the tank, the bowling ball and the feather falls equally in the experiment,

In fact, you now have removed the gases and the atmospheric pressure in the tank and this results in different "gravitational" motions inside the experiment compared to the similar outside experiment.

And your logics then tell you: The removed atmospheric pressure (for short) cancels out the gravitational motions and assumptions which Newton once had.

Ergo: It is the atmospheric pressure which pressures everything to the ground and NOT Newtons "occult agency".

 

[Polymath257]

Sorry for the delay of a response. Let´s analyze what is going on here.

1) You set up the experiment in the tank.
2) You remove most of the gases in the tank.
3) By removing the gases, you also removes the atmospheric pressure.
4) When there is no gases and atmospheric pressure in the tank, the bowling ball and the feather falls equally in the experiment,

In fact, you now have removed the gases and the atmospheric pressure in the tank and this results in different "gravitational" motions inside the experiment compared to the similar outside experiment.

The fact that they fall shows that it is NOT atmospheric pressure that produces the falling.

And your logics then tell you: The removed atmospheric pressure (for short) cancels out the gravitational motions and assumptions which Newton once had.

Ergo: It is the atmospheric pressure which pressures everything to the ground and NOT Newtons "occult agency".

Exactly wrong conclusion from the evidence. If it was atmospheric pressure that pushes things to the ground, the objects in a vacuum tank would not fall at all since there is no pressure.

What is happening is that air *slows* the rate of fall by producing friction counter to the motion. When that friction is removed, only gravity remains.

 

[Native]

And do you understand what it is saying?

Both the orbital velocity motions of planets and the concept of drag are at play - except from in the standard consensus theories.

 

[Polymath257]

Both the orbital velocity motions of planets and the concept of drag are at play - except from in the standard consensus theories.

So the answer is that you do not. There is no such drag today.

By the way, this *is* the standard consensus theory.

BTW, from your linked article:

"In astrophysics, dynamical friction or Chandrasekhar friction, sometimes called gravitational drag, is loss of momentum and kinetic energy of moving bodies through gravitational interactions with surrounding matter in space."

In other words, this is a *gravitational* effect, NOT any sort of atmospheric pressure!

 

[Native]

Exactly wrong conclusion from the evidence. If it was atmospheric pressure that pushes things to the ground, the objects in a vacuum tank would not fall at all since there is no pressure.

Turn on your logical senses and try again.

What is happening is that air *slows* the rate of fall by producing friction counter to the motion. When that friction is removed, only gravity remains.

Is that what happened? So the tank wasn´t empty at all after all. Have you removed the little left of "air", you´ll only have the very Newtonian occult agency theory of gravity itself left and no gravity at all.
.

 

[Native]

In other words, this is a *gravitational* effect, NOT any sort of atmospheric pressure!

You confuse the term "gravitational effect" for a braking power because of drag resistance. Come into the real world.

 

[Polymath257]

Turn on your logical senses and try again.

Is that what happened? So the tank wasn´t empty at all after all.

Huh? Yes, the tank was empty of air.

The air was *removed* from the tank. Things still fall. So it wasn't the air pressure making things fall.

Have you removed the little left of "air", you´ll only have the very Newtonian occult agency theory of gravity itself left and no gravity at all.
.

With the air removed, there is no air pressure. ALL that is left is gravity. Which is why things still fall: gravity still exists.

 

[Polymath257]

You confuse the term "gravitational effect" for a braking power because of drag resistance. Come into the real world.

Not according to the article YOU linked to. it is a 'drag' produced from the gravity of the surrounding matter, NOT a drag like atmospheric drag.

 

[Native]

Not according to the article YOU linked to. it is a 'drag' produced from the gravity of the surrounding matter, NOT a drag like atmospheric drag.

I just assumed you were aware of the "braking power because of drag resistance" - concept which I refered to.

 

[Polymath257]

I just assumed you were aware of the "braking power because of drag resistance" - concept which I refered to.

Oh, I am. That is NOT what is being discussed. The article *you* gave describes what is going on. it is a gravitational interaction that is producing the drag. It even gives the math.